Recently, The Seattle Times reported that an Amazon executive said that it was serendipitous to return to the office but had no data to back that up, even going so far as to say “actual data … it’s very hard to come by” and especially “any data that […] would stand scrutiny.”
Interesting take since everything Amazon does is grounded in data. He may well have said: “Because we’ve always done it that way.” Not the words you’d expect to hear from an innovator.
The same week, three workplace reports emerged.
Unispace revealed that 42% of companies mandating office returns experienced higher employee attrition than expected, while one-third are struggling to recruit. Greenhouse reported that more than 75% of employees might leave their jobs if their company eliminates flexible work schedules. The Federal Reserve likened mandatory full-time office attendance to a 2% to 3% pay cut in terms of retention.
The data has spoken. Why aren’t executives listening?
Maybe because the debate isn’t really about data, it’s about control. Required office time keeps control at the top. It’s optimized for management, not employees, around the belief that “if I can see you at a desk, you must be working.” It’s efficient and easily understood because it’s “how it’s always been done.”
In 1922, Henry Ford made the scandalous decision to alter his employees’ workweek from six days to five without reducing pay. The New York Herald newspaper declared: “The Ford plan is joyous news to all who like to think of bringing work down to the irresistible minimum.” (Sound familiar?)
But the joke was on them. Ford’s factories were equally productive and his workers spent more money in their time off. The change was good for society, business and economy.
A century — and second global pandemic — later, it’s time to channel Ford. I believe that means embracing a flexible workplace.
This pivot requires a level of customer-centricity and imaginative thinking that many executives are willing to do for their consumers but not their employees. It necessitates asking: “What does flexible mean?” for our business and each role (because it will vary).
For example, our AAA call center staff is now 100% remote because calls can be fielded anywhere. On the other hand, “flexible” for our fleet technicians means the ability to work four 10-hour days and get a third day off. Our knowledge workers in the office vary, with developers working remotely and accounts payable coming in a few days a week to process paperwork, to mention a few.
Microsoft’s 2022 Work Trend Index Report explores the idea of “productivity paranoia” — or when managers worry if their employees are working enough. This hits its peak when workers are out of sight. It, in turn, leads to “performative productivity,” or doing work to look busy and make the guys in the corner offices happy.
Both could be eliminated if leadership made it easy to do the right stuff well. Like most things, that starts at the top. According to the Microsoft report, nearly three-quarters of people managers believe more guidance on what to prioritize would improve their performance, but more than two-thirds say their managers have never given clear guidance in one-on-ones. (Assuming they’re even doing one-on-ones.)
It’s kind of a no-brainer: 1) Set priorities at the top. 2) Connect regularly to align the work to what matters. 3) Make it easy for everyone to do the right thing. If we can do that, it shouldn’t matter where we do the work. Our teams will be well-equipped to succeed together while finding much-needed work/life balance.
Is that wildly innovative? No. But often, breaking out of “how we’ve always done it” is exactly the push needed to think differently. The innovative thinking isn’t in choosing to be flexible. It’s in how we transform the way we create, engage and thrive together without being together.
Good news: I have the data to back it up and know it’s better. You can quote me on that.